United Nations General Assembly
The United Nations General Assembly is the legislative body of the UN and second highest authority in the UN after the constitution, here laws are proposed and voted on. Making a proposal It is primarily section 3 of the constitution that instructs on who may make proposals and how they are handled. Proposals can be on laws, actions and initiatives mandating the UN to take certain actions, repealments of existing laws or constitutional amendments. Proposals can be voted on by all eligible members as followed: *'Yay' (in approval of the proposal in its entirety) *'Nay' (in opposition of the proposal in its entirerty) *'Meh' (a deliberate abstention from the vote) Note that votes can't be conditional or with amendments, if one agrees with only parts of a proposal one should reject it and re-propose with amendments. To avoid such complications proposals should be discussed and thought out beforehand. It helps for those writing the proposals to be specific and unambiguous. Typically a proposal needs half of all eligible members to vote yay on its first vote cycle for it to be approved. Failing this it must secure a majority of all countries voting on it on its second vote cycle, though there are exceptions to this such as some things requiring a super-majority of 2/3 (see 3.3 of the constitution). Constitutional ammendments also require 3/4 of all eligible members to approve (as per 3.4 of the constitution). Voting cycles start and end on the saturday of each week with wednesday being considered the halfway point and cut off point for new proposals (proposals can still be made but are not considered to have completed a voting cycle on the following saturday) It is also helpful to add the date the proposal was made and who it was made by. Ideally give the proposal title the format of heading 3 and underline it. After the first vote cycle the number of the vote cycle should be put in front of the title (2).'' ''Current thresholds *Absolute Majority: 6 *Absolute Super Majority: 7 *Required for constitutional amendment: 8 Current Proposals (5) Adam Sandler should be put on trial (ISZ, 24/08/15) For his terrible film(s) and being terrible. May be disguised as Jack or as Jill. *Isimzia Yay *Artiria Yay - the new ICJ could do with being put through its paces *Tyran Nay *Amun-Seth Meh *Joe Nay *Aprillia Yay *SE Nay *Innovia Nay *Dalania Meh *Pippirria Yay Constitutional amendment: Treat Nay votes in the same way Yay votes are in regards to the rules regarding absolute majorities (ISZ 30/08/2015) The constitution specifies rules required for a proposal to pass in 3.2.1 and 3.2.2. though is silent on conditions for a proposal to be rejected. This amendment seeks to clarify this by codifying what is implicit: that rejection conditions work the same way: if an absolute majortiy of UN members vote Nay then the proposal is rejected on the first voting cycle, and that a simple majority of nays rejects the proposal on the second cycle. *Isimzia for *Artiria for *Amun-Seth for *Aprillia for. Was actually just wondering how this was going to work. *Tyran Yay *NoJ: Nay (13) (4)Outlaw ethnic cleansing (ART 31/08/15) Genocide, or ethnic cleansing, is to be outlawed regardless of the motivation behind it. *Artiria for *Dalania Yay *Aprillia points out that this is the EXACT same proposal as the one above. But votes yay anyway, as this one might stand more chance of passing because of Artirias ridiculous pettiness. **ART: We are in favour of both proposals. We proposed the amendment to ensure there was no room for misunderstanding. *Isimzia Nay *Innovia Nay *Amun-Seth Nay *Tyran Nay *Nation of Joe: Yay (45) (3) All nations should be required to check their white privilege. (APR 6/9/15) BECAUSE YOU JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND! *Aprillia Yay *Nation of Joe: Yay (96) *Amun-Seth meh *Artiria meh. *Isimzia Nay - feels this proposal is discriminatory as not all nations are white and therefore have no white privilege to check, you ought to check your privilege checking privilege. *Tyran Nay (2) UNEC Unity (ISZ 15/09/15) UNEC votes should be private and in public all councillors should espouse the collective decision in public (OOC: This is what the federal council of swiss does, which is analogous to UNEC) *ART: This holds the potential to prevent councillors from blowing the whistle on unconstitutional goings-on, as was instrumental in the dissolution of UNEC 9B. Public voting records and increased transparency will also inform the rotation voting process, as voting members have greater idea of how the standing representatives are likely to act. *Perhaps then this should be amended to exclude violations of the constitution, Isimzia Nay *Aprillia nay, this is silly. non binding pre-proposal for Constitutional amendment: reduce the term of the supreme judge from 15 cycles (ISZ, 19/09/15) This is an informal vote that seeks to gather consensus on an shortened length of the supreme judge's term. before the amendment is proposed 2 points should be clarified: -if the length is shortened to 12 cycles or 10 cycles -if the proposal should apply to the incumbent judge *Isimzia favours 10 cycles and that it should not apply retroactively to the term of the incumbent supreme judge. *ART: We could also change the Supreme Judge at the same time as the UNEC. **Joe "It has been said that the judge should stay longer to provide more stability. A point that NoJ *rolls die* agrees with (78)" *Nation of Joe: In favour of 10 Cycles (38), Should not apply to incumbent judge (9) *Aprillia agrees with 10, with no retroactive application. *Tyran in favour of 10 cycles. Proposals awaiting sorting Category:UN Category:BUN